FAO: Involving local farmers is key to success of foreign investment

ROME, Nov. 13, 2012- International investments that give local farmers an active role and leave them in control of their land have the most positive effects on local economies and social development, according to a new FAO report published today.

The report, Trends and Impacts of Foreign Investment in Developing Country Agriculture, emphasizes that investment projects that combine the strengths of the investor (capital, management and marketing expertise, and technology) with those of local farmers (labour, land, local knowledge) are most successful. Business models that leave farmers in control of their land give them an incentive to invest in land improvements and also favor sustainable development, stated the FAO release. The publication offers a number of case studies on the impact of foreign investment in Africa and Asia, including large-scale land deals often referred to as land grabbing. "While a number of studies document the negative impacts of large-scale land acquisition in developing countries, there is much less evidence of its benefits to the host country, especially in the short-term and at local level," according to the report. "For investments involving large-scale land acquisition in countries where land rights are unclear and insecure, the disadvantages often outweigh the few benefits to the local community," it notes. The report advises that "acquisition of already-utilized land to establish new large farms should be avoided and other forms of investment should be considered." The report explains that in large-scale land investments the main type of benefit appears to lie in employment generation, but there are questions as to the net gains and sustainability of the jobs created. "In several projects the number of jobs was lower than what was initially announced ... and in some projects even low-skilled worker jobs were mainly taken up by non-locals". Foreign investment in agricultural land in developing countries has increased markedly over the past decade, according to the report. The lands acquired tend to be among the best available, with good soil quality and irrigation. But since a majority of foreign investment projects aim at export markets or the production of biofuels, "they may pose a threat to food security in low-income food-deficit countries, especially if they replace food crops that were destined for the local market." Potential adverse impacts include: the displacement of smallholders; the loss of grazing land for pastoralists; the loss of income and livelihoods for rural people; and degradation of natural resources such as land, water and biodiversity. Alternatives to land acquisition include contract farming deals, outgrower schemes giving farmers a share of the capital, and joint ventures between investing companies and farmer cooperatives. Inclusive business models require effective local organizations that also represent groups who are often marginalized such as women, young people, landless farmers and migrant workers. FAO estimates that foreign direct investment to the tune of more than $80 billion a year is needed to keep pace with population and income growth, and feed more than 9 billion people in 2050. Although Foreign Direct Investment has risen significantly, especially in Asia and Latin America over the past decade, only a small share goes to agriculture -- less than five percent in sub-Saharan Africa. This represents an opportunity, however, given the high potential for growth, particularly in the light of currently high international food prices. "It is important that any international investment should bring development benefits to the receiving country...if those investments are to be ‘win-win' rather than 'neo-colonialism'", stresses David Hallam, Director of FAO's Trade and Markets Division in a foreword to the report.

This week’s guest on Open Mic is Dr. Jayson Lusk, Distinguished Professor and Head of the Agriculture Economics Department at Purdue University. With heightened debate on food and farm policy surrounding the development of a new farm bill, Dr. Lusk offers challenging insight about the relationship between political persuasion and food, work requirements for SNAP recipients and evolving preferences in meat consumption.

The House Agriculture Committee was set to mark up a new farm bill next week, but Democratic objections over planned nutrition changes have caused a delay. Agri-Pulse's Phil Brasher and Spencer Chase have more on that and a fix to the GOP tax bill in this week's video.

The world of agriculture extends beyond what’s growing in your field or living in your barn, and here at Agri-Pulse, we understand that. We make it our duty to inform you of the most up-to-date agricultural and rural policy decisions being made in Washington D.C. and examine how they will affect you – the farmer, the lobbyist, the government employee, the educator, the consultant and the concerned citizen.